In a decision that experts called “historic,” a federal judge has ruled that Iran was complicit in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people.

“The extensive record submitted to this court, including fact witnesses and expert testimony, is satisfactory to this court,” Judge Daniels said. The court “accepts as true” the various allegations of the plaintiffs and their experts, he declared, and “will issue an order” in the coming days that Iran bears legal responsibility for providing “material support” to the 9/11 plotters and hijackers.

Thomas Mellon, who headed a consortium of attorneys who worked on the $100 billion lawsuit, has said that the purpose of the suit is to force the U.S. government to hold Iran accountable for its role in 9/11.

Using a team of experts, including former members of the 9/11 Commission, and the testimony of three Iranian defectors, the lawyers put on a four-hour presentation for Daniels on Thursday.

During the hearing, defector Abdolghassem Mesbahi, who was once an aide and close confidant of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founder, revealed that he had firsthand knowledge of terrorist plots dating to the 1980s.

Mesbahi, whose identity was kept secret until the hearing, said he knew in August 2001 that there was a plan in place to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings.

Another defector testified that he was with al-Qaida’s second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, when the terrorist attended four days of meetings with top Iranian officials in January 2001 to plan the 9/11 attacks.

The third defector told the judge that he helped write up the debriefing reports of Iran’s al-Qaida liaison, Imad Mugniyeh, after he returned to Iran from Afghanistan following 9/11.

To further prove Iran’s complicity in the attacks, Mellon presented the testimony of Janice Kephart, a former counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information and former immigration counsel to the Sept. 11 Commission.

Kephart said Iran put a “senior Hezbollah operative” on flights with the 9/11 hijackers in the months before the attacks, to ensure that the terrorists’ passports, which they obtained in Saudi Arabia, wouldn’t be stamped with Iranian or Afghan travel stamps, red flags that would have jeopardized their plot.

Kephart noted that travel documents are “important weapons” for terrorists.

Investigator Ken Timmerman, another terrorism expert who gathered information for the suit, said the judge’s ruling should make U.S officials take notice.

“This is a historic event. An official U.S court judgment that finds for the first time that the government of the Islamic part of Iran has been found to have direct, legal and criminal involvement in the 9/11 attacks. It’s nothing short of historic,” the investigator said.

S. M. Asadabadi in May detailed previous US administrative embelishments against Iran:

On June 2006, Sayed Mousavi, a community leader at An Nabi Mosque in Southern California, was arrested at gunpoint as family members watched in despair. The government originally charged him with terror-related charges that were later dropped. However, in October 2008 he was convicted of filing false tax returns, omitting information on naturalization forms and violating an economic embargo against Iran and sentenced to 33 months in prison. He was released on good behavior, having spent 29 months in solitary confinement at a federal prison. Many believed the charges were baseless and Mousavi was targeted because of his religion. On May 5, 2010 the Ninth District Court of Appeal overturned the circuit court jury conviction of the immigration charges, thus clearing his good name.

Similarly, spiritual and motivational speaker, Rafic Labboun from the Bay Area, was arrested by FBI agents on allegations of credit card fraud. During the trial, an obscure and baseless connection was made attempting to link him with Hasan Nasrullah of Hezbollah. On July 19, Labboun was sentenced to 27 months with 3 years probation and fined $100,000. Labboun and his attorneys plan to appeal.

In 2007, former member of Guyana’s parliament and mayor of Guyana’s second largest city, Linden, Abdul Kadir was arrested in Trinidad in connection with a plot to detonate jet-fuel supply tanks and pipelines at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Kadir was picked up while en route to Iran for an Islamic conference in the Shi'a city of Qom. Declaring his innocence, defense lawyers have denied their client is a militant and claim he was framed by a shady informant. Kadir was sentenced to life on December, 14, 2009.

This persecution was not limited to individuals, Last year, the US government seized four mosques and a skyscraper owned by the Alavi Foundation, an Islamic nonprofit organization in New York that federal prosecutors alleged was a front for the Iranian government. Federal prosecutors claim the foundation sent millions of dollars to Iran's Bank Melli and the US Treasury Department further claims that the bank is a key fundraising arm for Iran's nuclear program. Unconfirmed reports say a possible agreement is in the works in which the federal government will have an observant role over the foundation and have full disclosure of all its activities and those affiliated with the organization.

Reportedly, several mosques in the country have been accused by federal prosecutors of laundering money to Iranian interests overseas when in fact they were supporting widows and orphans who have been victims of Al-Qaida and the Taliban.

[...]

Additionally, a concentrated effort is being made to build up the Iranian threat to security. This is all very reminiscent of the embellishments made before the Iraq war.

The Domestic Iranian "Terrorists"

On June 2006, Sayed Mousavi, a community leader at An Nabi Mosque in Southern California, was arrested at gunpoint as family members watched in despair. The government originally charged him with terror-related charges that were later dropped. However, in October 2008 he was convicted of filing false tax returns, omitting information on naturalization forms and violating an economic embargo against Iran and sentenced to 33 months in prison. He was released on good behavior, having spent 29 months in solitary confinement at a federal prison. Many believed the charges were baseless and Mousavi was targeted because of his religion. On May 5, 2010 the Ninth District Court of Appeal overturned the circuit court jury conviction of the immigration charges, thus clearing his good name.

Similarly, spiritual and motivational speaker, Rafic Labboun from the Bay Area, was arrested by FBI agents on allegations of credit card fraud. During the trial, an obscure and baseless connection was made attempting to link him with Hasan Nasrullah of Hezbollah. On July 19, Labboun was sentenced to 27 months with 3 years probation and fined $100,000. Labboun and his attorneys plan to appeal.

In 2007, former member of Guyana’s parliament and mayor of Guyana’s second largest city, Linden, Abdul Kadir was arrested in Trinidad in connection with a plot to detonate jet-fuel supply tanks and pipelines at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Kadir was picked up while en route to Iran for an Islamic conference in the Shi'a city of Qom. Declaring his innocence, defense lawyers have denied their client is a militant and claim he was framed by a shady informant. Kadir was sentenced to life on December, 14, 2009.

This persecution was not limited to individuals, Last year, the US government seized four mosques and a skyscraper owned by the Alavi Foundation, an Islamic nonprofit organization in New York that federal prosecutors alleged was a front for the Iranian government. Federal prosecutors claim the foundation sent millions of dollars to Iran's Bank Melli and the US Treasury Department further claims that the bank is a key fundraising arm for Iran's nuclear program. Unconfirmed reports say a possible agreement is in the works in which the federal government will have an observant role over the foundation and have full disclosure of all its activities and those affiliated with the organization. Reportedly, several mosques in the country have been accused by federal prosecutors of laundering money to Iranian interests overseas when in fact they were supporting widows and orphans who have been victims of Al-Qaida and the Taliban.

The city witnessed fierce fighting in 2004 as US forces carried out a major offensive against insurgents.

Now, the level of heart defects among newborn babies is said to be 13 times higher than in Europe.

The US military says it is not aware of any official reports showing an increase in birth defects in the area.

BBC world affairs editor John Simpson visited a new, US-funded hospital in Falluja where paediatrician Samira al-Ani told him that she was seeing as many as two or three cases a day, mainly cardiac defects.

Our correspondent also saw children in the city who were suffering from paralysis or brain damage - and a photograph of one baby who was born with three heads.

He adds that he heard many times that officials in Falluja had warned women that they should not have children.

Doctors and parents believe the problem is the highly sophisticated weapons the US troops used in Falluja six years ago.

British-based Iraqi researcher Malik Hamdan told the BBC's World Today programme that doctors in Falluja were witnessing a "massive unprecedented number" of heart defects, and an increase in the number of nervous system defects.

She said that one doctor in the city had compared data about birth defects from before 2003 - when she saw about one case every two months - with the situation now, when, she saw cases every day.

Ms Hamdan said that based on data from January this year, the rate of congenital heart defects was 95 per 1,000 births - 13 times the rate found in Europe.

"I've seen footage of babies born with an eye in the middle of the forehead, the nose on the forehead," she added.

A spokesman for the US military, Michael Kilpatrick, said it always took public health concerns "very seriously".

"Unexploded ordinance, including improvised explosive devices, are a recognised hazard," he added.

The city witnessed fierce fighting in 2004 as US forces carried out a major offensive against insurgents.

Now, the level of heart defects among newborn babies is said to be 13 times higher than in Europe.The US military says it is not aware of any official reports showing an increase in birth defects in the area.

BBC world affairs editor John Simpson visited a new, US-funded hospital in Falluja where paediatrician Samira al-Ani told him that she was seeing as many as two or three cases a day, mainly cardiac defects.

Our correspondent also saw children in the city who were suffering from paralysis or brain damage - and a photograph of one baby who was born with three heads.

He adds that he heard many times that officials in Falluja had warned women that they should not have children.

Doctors and parents believe the problem is the highly sophisticated weapons the US troops used in Falluja six years ago.

British-based Iraqi researcher Malik Hamdan told the BBC's World Today programme that doctors in Falluja were witnessing a "massive unprecedented number" of heart defects, and an increase in the number of nervous system defects.

She said that one doctor in the city had compared data about birth defects from before 2003 - when she saw about one case every two months - with the situation now, when, she saw cases every day.

Ms Hamdan said that based on data from January this year, the rate of congenital heart defects was 95 per 1,000 births - 13 times the rate found in Europe.

"I've seen footage of babies born with an eye in the middle of the forehead, the nose on the forehead," she added.

A spokesman for the US military, Michael Kilpatrick, said it always took public health concerns "very seriously".

WASHINGTON — The stealth C.I.A. drone that crashed deep inside Iranian territory last week was part of a stepped-up surveillance program that has frequently sent the United States’ most hard-to-detect drone into the country to map suspected nuclear sites, according to foreign officials and American experts who have been briefed on the effort.

Until this week, the high-altitude flights from bases in Afghanistan were among the most secret of many intelligence-collection efforts against Iran, and American officials refuse to discuss it. But the crash of the vehicle, which Iranian officials said occurred more than 140 miles from the border with Afghanistan, blew the program’s cover.

The overflights by the bat-winged RQ-170 Sentinel, built by Lockheed Martin and first glimpsed on an airfield in Kandahar, Afghanistan, in 2009, are part of an increasingly aggressive intelligence collection program aimed at Iran, current and former officials say. The urgency of the effort has been underscored by a recent public debate in Israel about whether time is running out for a military strike to slow Iran’s progress toward a nuclear weapon.

[T]he centerpiece of what had been a covert program is now in the hands of Iranian forces, which may share the captured technology with other countries. There are differing accounts of the extent of the damage to the craft; Iran has not published photographs of the wreckage, though officials have said video of the drone may soon be broadcast on television.

WASHINGTON — The stealth C.I.A. drone that crashed deep inside Iranian territory last week was part of a stepped-up surveillance program that has frequently sent the United States’ most hard-to-detect drone into the country to map suspected nuclear sites, according to foreign officials and American experts who have been briefed on the effort.

Until this week, the high-altitude flights from bases in Afghanistan were among the most secret of many intelligence-collection efforts against Iran, and American officials refuse to discuss it. But the crash of the vehicle, which Iranian officials said occurred more than 140 miles from the border with Afghanistan, blew the program’s cover.

The overflights by the bat-winged RQ-170 Sentinel, built by Lockheed Martin and first glimpsed on an airfield in Kandahar, Afghanistan, in 2009, are part of an increasingly aggressive intelligence collection program aimed at Iran, current and former officials say. The urgency of the effort has been underscored by a recent public debate in Israel about whether time is running out for a military strike to slow Iran’s progress toward a nuclear weapon.

[T]he centerpiece of what had been a covert program is now in the hands of Iranian forces, which may share the captured technology with other countries. There are differing accounts of the extent of the damage to the craft; Iran has not published photographs of the wreckage, though officials have said video of the drone may soon be broadcast on television.

A pair of high profile attacks against Shi’ite worshipers commemorating the Ashura holiday have left at least 60 dead and hundreds of others wounded. The Pakistani group Lashkar-e Jhangvi (LeJ), which often targets Shi’ites in Pakistan, claimed credit for the larger of the two attacks.

In this attack, a suicide bomber hit the Abul Fazel shrine as pilgrims gathered. The shrine is in central Kabul and the casualties overwhelmed the area hospitals. Authorities say the toll is expected to rise as many of the wounded are waiting hours for treatment.

A second attack targeted a smaller shrine in the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif, killing four people and wounding a number of others.

The Taliban issued a statement condemning the attacks, saying they were “cruel and indiscriminate” and blaming the “invading enemy.” Taliban leaders have recently admonished followers against attacks on Afghan civilians, saying they undermine popular support.

A pair of high profile attacks against Shi’ite worshipers commemorating the Ashura holiday have left at least 60 dead and hundreds of others wounded. The Pakistani group Lashkar-e Jhangvi (LeJ), which often targets Shi’ites in Pakistan, claimed credit for the larger of the two attacks.

In this attack, a suicide bomber hit the Abul Fazel shrine as pilgrims gathered. The shrine is in central Kabul and the casualties overwhelmed the area hospitals. Authorities say the toll is expected to rise as many of the wounded are waiting hours for treatment.A second attack targeted a smaller shrine in the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif, killing four people and wounding a number of others.

The Taliban issued a statement condemning the attacks, saying they were “cruel and indiscriminate” and blaming the “invading enemy.” Taliban leaders have recently admonished followers against attacks on Afghan civilians, saying they undermine popular support.

It's a weird irony that Iranians know the history of Anglo-Persian relations better than the Brits. When the newly installed Ministry of Islamic Guidance asked Harvey Morris, Reuters' man in post-revolutionary Iran, for a history of his news agency, he asked his London office to send him a biography of Baron von Reuter – and was appalled to discover the founder of the world's greatest news agency had built Persia's railways at an immense profit. "How can I show this to the ministry?" he shouted. "It turns out that the Baron was worse than the fucking Shah!" Of which, of course, the ministry was well aware.

Britain staged a joint invasion of Iran with Soviet forces when the Shah's predecessor got a bit too close to the Nazis in World War Two and then helped the Americans overthrow the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 after he nationalised Britain's oil possessions in the country.

This was not a myth but a real, down-to-earth conspiracy. The CIA called it Operation Ajax; the Brits wisely kept their ambitions in check by calling it Operation Boot. MI6's agent in Tehran was Colonel Monty Woodhouse, previously our Special Operations Executive man inside German-occupied Greece. I knew "Monty" well – we co-operated together when I investigated the grim wartime career of ex-UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim – and he was a ruthless man. Woodhouse brought weapons into Iran for a still non-existent "resistance" movement and he eagerly supported the CIA's project to fund the "bazaaris" of Tehran to stage demonstrations (in which, of course, hundreds, perhaps thousands, died) to overthrow Mossadegh.

Something is brewing--First the UK pulls it's staff, then Gernmany pull it's Ambassador -- is this an effort to minimize foreign casualities? Who will attack Iran?

Robert Fisk: Sanctions are only a small part of the history that makes Iranians hate the UK

It's a weird irony that Iranians know the history of Anglo-Persian relations better than the Brits. When the newly installed Ministry of Islamic Guidance asked Harvey Morris, Reuters' man in post-revolutionary Iran, for a history of his news agency, he asked his London office to send him a biography of Baron von Reuter – and was appalled to discover the founder of the world's greatest news agency had built Persia's railways at an immense profit. "How can I show this to the ministry?" he shouted. "It turns out that the Baron was worse than the fucking Shah!" Of which, of course, the ministry was well aware.

Britain staged a joint invasion of Iran with Soviet forces when the Shah's predecessor got a bit too close to the Nazis in World War Two and then helped the Americans overthrow the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 after he nationalised Britain's oil possessions in the country.This was not a myth but a real, down-to-earth conspiracy. The CIA called it Operation Ajax; the Brits wisely kept their ambitions in check by calling it Operation Boot. MI6's agent in Tehran was Colonel Monty Woodhouse, previously our Special Operations Executive man inside German-occupied Greece. I knew "Monty" well – we co-operated together when I investigated the grim wartime career of ex-UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim – and he was a ruthless man. Woodhouse brought weapons into Iran for a still non-existent "resistance" movement and he eagerly supported the CIA's project to fund the "bazaaris" of Tehran to stage demonstrations (in which, of course, hundreds, perhaps thousands, died) to overthrow Mossadegh.

Critics say bureau is running a sting operation across America, targeting vulnerable people by luring them into fake terror plots

David Williams did not have an easy life. He moved to Newburgh, a gritty, impoverished town on the banks of the Hudson an hour or so north of New York, at just 10 years old. For a young, black American boy with a father in jail, trouble was everywhere.

Williams also made bad choices. He ended up going to jail for dealing drugs. When he came out in 2007 he tried to go straight, but money was tight and his brother, Lord, needed cash for a liver transplant. Life is hard in Newburgh if you are poor, have a drug rap and need cash quickly.

His aunt, Alicia McWilliams, was honest about the tough streets her nephew was dealing with. "Newburgh is a hard place," she said. So it was perhaps no surprise that in May, 2009, David Williams was arrested again and hit with a 25-year jail sentence. But it was not for drugs offences. Or any other common crime. Instead Williams and three other struggling local men beset by drug, criminal and mental health issues were convicted of an Islamic terrorist plot to blow up Jewish synagogues and shoot down military jets with missiles.

Even more shocking was that the organisation, money, weapons and motivation for this plot did not come from real Islamic terrorists. It came from the FBI, and an informant paid to pose as a terrorist mastermind paying big bucks for help in carrying out an attack. For McWilliams, her own government had actually cajoled and paid her beloved nephew into being a terrorist, created a fake plot and then jailed him for it. "I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone," she told the Guardian.

Lawyers for the so-called Newburgh Four have now launched an appeal that will be held early next year. Advocates hope the case offers the best chance of exposing the issue of FBI "entrapment" in terror cases. "We have as close to a legal entrapment case as I have ever seen," said Susanne Brody, who represents another Newburgh defendant, Onta Williams.

Some experts agree. "The target, the motive, the ideology and the plot were all led by the FBI," said Karen Greenberg, a law professor at Fordham University in New York, who specialises in studying the new FBI tactics.

But the issue is one that stretches far beyond Newburgh. Critics say the FBI is running a sting operation across America, targeting – to a large extent – the Muslim community by luring people into fake terror plots. FBI bureaux send informants to trawl through Muslim communities, hang out in mosques and community centres, and talk of radical Islam in order to identify possible targets sympathetic to such ideals. Or they will respond to the most bizarre of tip-offs, including, in one case, a man who claimed to have seen terror chief Ayman al-Zawahiri living in northern California in the late 1990s.

That tipster was quickly hired as a well-paid informant. If suitable suspects are identified, FBI agents then run a sting, often creating a fake terror plot in which it helps supply weapons and targets. Then, dramatic arrests are made, press conferences held and lengthy convictions secured.

But what is not clear is if many real, actual terrorists are involved.

The homes of the Fort Dix Five were raided by the FBI. Photograph: Joseph Kaczmarek/AP

Another "entrapment" case is on the radar too. The Fort Dix Five – accused of plotting to attack a New Jersey army base – have also appealed against their convictions. That case too involved dubious use of paid informants, an apparent over-reach of evidence and a plot that seemed suggested by the government.

Burim Duka, whose three brothers were jailed for life for their part in the scheme, insists they did not know they were part of a terror plot and were just buying guns for shooting holidays in a deal arranged by a friend. The "friend" was an informant who had persuaded another man of a desire to attack Fort Dix.

Duka is convinced his brothers' appeal has a good chance. "I am hopeful," he told the Guardian.

But things may not be that easy. At issue is the word "entrapment", which has two definitions. There is the common usage, where a citizen might see FBI operations as deliberate traps manipulating unwary people who otherwise were unlikely to become terrorists. Then there is the legal definition of entrapment, where the prosecution merely has to show a subject was predisposed to carry out the actions they later are accused of.

Theoretically, a simple expression, like support for jihad, might suffice, and in post-9/11 America neither judges nor juries tend to be nuanced in terror trials. "Legally, you have to use the word entrapment very carefully. It is a very strict legal term," said Greenberg.

But in its commonly understood usage, FBI entrapment is a widespread tactic. Within days of the 9/11 terror attacks, FBI director Robert Mueller issued a memo on a new policy of "forward leaning – preventative – prosecutions".

Central to that is a growing informant network. The FBI is not choosy about the people it uses. Some have criminal records, including attempted murder or drug dealing or fraud. They are often paid six-figure sums, which critics say creates a motivation to entrap targets. Some are motivated by the promise of debts forgiven or immigration violations wiped clean. There has also been a relaxing of rules on what criteria the FBI needs to launch an investigation.

Often they just seem to be "fishing expeditions". In the Newburgh case, the men involved met FBI informant Shahed Hussain simply because he happened to infiltrate their mosque. In southern California, FBI informant Craig Monteilh trawled mosques posing as a Muslim and tried to act as a magnet for potential radicals.

Monteilh, who bugged scores of people, is a convicted felon with serious drug charges to his name. His operation turned up nothing. But Monteilh's professed terrorist sympathy so unnerved his Muslim targets that they got a restraining order against him and alerted the FBI, not realising Monteilh was actually working on the bureau's behalf.

Muslim civil rights groups have warned of a feeling of being hounded and threatened by the FBI, triggering a natural fear of the authorities among people that should be a vital defence against real terror attacks. But FBI tactics could now be putting off many people from reporting tip-offs or suspicious individuals.

"They are making mosques suspicious of anybody. They are putting fear into these communities," said Greenberg. Civil liberties groups are also concerned, seeing some FBI tactics as using terrorism to justify more power. "We are still seeing an expansion of these tools. It is a terrible prospect," said Mike German, an expert at the American Civil Liberties Union and a former FBI agent who has worked in counter-terrorism.

German said suspects convicted of plotting terror attacks in some recent FBI cases bore little resemblance to the profile of most terrorist cells. "Most of these suspect terrorists had no access to weapons unless the government provided them. I would say that showed they were not the biggest threat to the US," German said.

"Most terrorists have links to foreign terrorist groups and have trained in terrorism training camps. Perhaps FBI resources should be spent finding those guys."

Also, some of the most serious terrorist attacks carried out in the US since 9/11 have revolved around "lone wolf" actions, not the sort of conspiracy plots the FBI have been striving to combat. The 2010 Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, only came to light after his car bomb failed to go off properly. The Fort Hood killer Nidal Malik Hasan, who shot dead 13 people on a Texas army base in 2009, was only discovered after he started firing. Both evaded the radar of an FBI expending resources setting up fictional crimes and then prosecuting those involved.

Yet, as advocates for those caught up in "entrapment" cases discover, there is little public or judicial sympathy for them. Even in cases where judges have admitted FBI tactics have raised serious questions, there has been no hesitation in returning guilty verdicts, handing down lengthy sentences and dismissing appeals.

The Liberty City Seven are a case in point. The 2006 case involved an informant, Elie Assaad, with a dubious past (he was once arrested, but not charged, for beating his pregnant wife). Assaad was let loose with another informant on a group of men in Liberty City, a poor, predominantly black, suburb of Miami. The targets were followers of a cult-like group called The Seas of David, led by former Guardian Angel Narseal Batiste.

The group was, perhaps, not even Muslim, as its religious practices involved Bible study and wearing the Star of David. Yet Assaad posed as an Al-Qaida operative, and got members of the group to swear allegiance. Transcripts of the "oath-taking" ceremony are almost farcical. Batiste repeatedly queries the idea and appears bullied into it. In effect, defence lawyers argued, the men were confused, impoverished members of an obscure cult.

Yet targets the group supposedly entertained attacking included the Sears Tower in Chicago, Hollywood movie studios and the Empire State Building. Even zealous prosecutors, painting a picture of dedicated Islamic terrorists, admitted any potential plots were "aspirational", given the group had no means to carry them out.

Nonetheless, they were charged with seeking to wage war against America, plotting to destroy buildings and supporting terrorism. Five of them got long jail sentences. Assaad, who was recently arrested in Texas for attempting to run over a policeman, was paid $85,000 for his work.

This year the jailed Liberty City men launched an appeal and last week judgment was handed down. They lost, and officially remain Islamic terrorists hell-bent on destroying America. Not that their supporters see it that way.

"Our country is no safer as a result of the prosecution of these seven impoverished young men from Liberty City," said Batiste's lawyer, Ana Jhones.

"This prosecution came at great financial cost to our government, and at a terrible emotional cost to these defendants and their families. It is my sincere belief that our country is less safe as a result of the government's actions in this case."

David Williams did not have an easy life. He moved to Newburgh, a gritty, impoverished town on the banks of the Hudson an hour or so north of New York, at just 10 years old. For a young, black American boy with a father in jail, trouble was everywhere.

Williams also made bad choices. He ended up going to jail for dealing drugs. When he came out in 2007 he tried to go straight, but money was tight and his brother, Lord, needed cash for a liver transplant. Life is hard in Newburgh if you are poor, have a drug rap and need cash quickly.His aunt, Alicia McWilliams, was honest about the tough streets her nephew was dealing with. "Newburgh is a hard place," she said. So it was perhaps no surprise that in May, 2009, David Williams was arrested again and hit with a 25-year jail sentence. But it was not for drugs offences. Or any other common crime. Instead Williams and three other struggling local men beset by drug, criminal and mental health issues were convicted of an Islamic terrorist plot to blow up Jewish synagogues and shoot down military jets with missiles.

Even more shocking was that the organisation, money, weapons and motivation for this plot did not come from real Islamic terrorists. It came from the FBI, and an informant paid to pose as a terrorist mastermind paying big bucks for help in carrying out an attack. For McWilliams, her own government had actually cajoled and paid her beloved nephew into being a terrorist, created a fake plot and then jailed him for it. "I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone," she told the Guardian.

Lawyers for the so-called Newburgh Four have now launched an appeal that will be held early next year. Advocates hope the case offers the best chance of exposing the issue of FBI "entrapment" in terror cases. "We have as close to a legal entrapment case as I have ever seen," said Susanne Brody, who represents another Newburgh defendant, Onta Williams.

Some experts agree. "The target, the motive, the ideology and the plot were all led by the FBI," said Karen Greenberg, a law professor at Fordham University in New York, who specialises in studying the new FBI tactics.

But the issue is one that stretches far beyond Newburgh. Critics say the FBI is running a sting operation across America, targeting – to a large extent – the Muslim community by luring people into fake terror plots. FBI bureaux send informants to trawl through Muslim communities, hang out in mosques and community centres, and talk of radical Islam in order to identify possible targets sympathetic to such ideals. Or they will respond to the most bizarre of tip-offs, including, in one case, a man who claimed to have seen terror chief Ayman al-Zawahiri living in northern California in the late 1990s.

That tipster was quickly hired as a well-paid informant. If suitable suspects are identified, FBI agents then run a sting, often creating a fake terror plot in which it helps supply weapons and targets. Then, dramatic arrests are made, press conferences held and lengthy convictions secured.But what is not clear is if many real, actual terrorists are involved.

The homes of the Fort Dix Five were raided by the FBI. Photograph: Joseph Kaczmarek/APAnother "entrapment" case is on the radar too. The Fort Dix Five – accused of plotting to attack a New Jersey army base – have also appealed against their convictions. That case too involved dubious use of paid informants, an apparent over-reach of evidence and a plot that seemed suggested by the government.

Burim Duka, whose three brothers were jailed for life for their part in the scheme, insists they did not know they were part of a terror plot and were just buying guns for shooting holidays in a deal arranged by a friend. The "friend" was an informant who had persuaded another man of a desire to attack Fort Dix.

Duka is convinced his brothers' appeal has a good chance. "I am hopeful," he told the Guardian. But things may not be that easy. At issue is the word "entrapment", which has two definitions. There is the common usage, where a citizen might see FBI operations as deliberate traps manipulating unwary people who otherwise were unlikely to become terrorists. Then there is the legal definition of entrapment, where the prosecution merely has to show a subject was predisposed to carry out the actions they later are accused of.

Bloodbath, OWS attempts to march to Stock Exchange ends in a bloody mess

Written by Oppression.org

Friday, 18 November 2011 15:25

Thousands of anti-Wall Street protesters clashed with cops today across lower Manhattan, starting with a march on the New York Stock Exchange this morning and ending with a crossing of the Brooklyn Bridge that snarled traffic.

Cops responded in force, at one point this afternoon sweeping into Zuccotti Park and arresting anyone inside. In total, at least 275 people were busted by cops; five of whom were charged with assault.

The culmination of the day of protests to mark the movement's two-month anniversary began with hundreds of protesters massing on the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge.

Cops quickly moved in and began arresting them. Centre and Chambers streets were packed with protesters.

Thousands of anti-Wall Street protesters clashed with cops today across lower Manhattan, starting with a march on the New York Stock Exchange this morning and ending with a crossing of the Brooklyn Bridge that snarled traffic.

Cops responded in force, at one point this afternoon sweeping into Zuccotti Park and arresting anyone inside. In total, at least 275 people were busted by cops; five of whom were charged with assault.The culmination of the day of protests to mark the movement's two-month anniversary began with hundreds of protesters massing on the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge.

Ninty-nine people wearing white T-shirts reading "99%" sat down on Park Row, blocking traffic.Cops quickly moved in and began arresting them. Centre and Chambers streets were packed with protesters.